 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2006Question about digital resolution
Hi... I first posted this in a different group. This one is more applicable. I am an amateur photographer (35 mm) that is looking to take it more seriously and learn and practice... to the point that I can take quality protraits.... and in time... maybe even shoot weddings. I know digital is the way to go these days...so my question is this.... For good quality portrait enlargements up to say 11x14... How many megapixels should I expect to have to purchase? is 10 enough? 16? (is there anything else I may need to know about digital resolution?) Also.... is it reasonable to think I could use a digital SLR for weddings and events? Thank you.... more to come. > How many megapixels should I expect to have to purchase? is 10 enough? > 16? > (is there anything else I may need to know about digital resolution?) I have some fine 16x20s from my 6.3MP 10D hanging on the wall. > Also.... is it reasonable to think I could use a digital SLR for > weddings and events? If I were still doing weddings, I wouldn't hesitate to use my 10D. But then, I'm a highly trained former professional. :-) >> How many megapixels should I expect to have to purchase? is 10 enough? >> 16? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >If I were still doing weddings, I wouldn't hesitate to use my 10D. But >then, I'm a highly trained former professional. :-) http://www.andrebell.com/monkey.jpg > Hi... I first posted this in a different group. This one is more > applicable. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Thank you.... more to come. As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then get the most you can). Stick with proven equipment, the Canon 20D or 30D or the Nikon D200. The cheaper Canons have mirror prisms, which kill any fine tuning on focusing, the pentaprisms in the more expensive models really do make a difference. If you compare those three cameras to 35mm you'll be happy. The higher the MP the better lenses you need, even the D200 can make mediocre lenses look very bad. Good luck Tom > As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be > better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then > get the most you can). Stick with proven equipment, the Canon 20D or > 30D or the Nikon D200. And Pentax is somehow not "proven" equipment? That's interesting. >> As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be >> better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then >> get the most you can). Stick with proven equipment, the Canon 20D or >> 30D or the Nikon D200. > >And Pentax is somehow not "proven" equipment? That's interesting. The fact that Pentax and Nikon use identical Sony sensors is also interesting. ;-) >>> As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be >>> better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The fact that Pentax and Nikon use identical Sony sensors is also > interesting. ;-) I see Pentax have finally "Officially" anounced their new 645 D-SLR >>> As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be >>> better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The fact that Pentax and Nikon use identical Sony sensors is also > interesting. ;-) Having the same sensors makes the cameras equal? I think not. ;) >> As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be >> better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then >> get the most you can). Stick with proven equipment, the Canon 20D or >> 30D or the Nikon D200. > > And Pentax is somehow not "proven" equipment? That's interesting. Maybe the poster is trying to say that Nikon and Canon are the most popular cameras among pros, therefore they are "proven." Back to the original post, I have a friend who is a pro and has beautiful 16x20's hanging on her wall taken with a Nikon D100. She just upgraded to a D200, not for the extra megapixels, although that's a nice reason to upgrade, but for the larger buffer since she shoots in RAW mode all the time. As for using digital for wedding photography, what could be better than the opportunity to view your images immediately after you take them? >>> As Randall said for 11x14s 6mp would be fine, but 8 or 10 would be >>> better and 16 overkill (unless you have the $ for the equipment, then [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Maybe the poster is trying to say that Nikon and Canon are the most > popular cameras among pros, therefore they are "proven." Or perhaps they were marketed better? > As for using digital for wedding photography, what could be better than the > opportunity to view your images immediately after you take them? Portraits are generally somewhat soft, and that's desireable so 6MP is just fine for 13x19 or so. Weddings are difficult for a number of reasons so it's good to have excellent fast manual control of all the settings and a big buffer helps too. Lastly weddings involve extreme high contrast so a camera with good dynamic range is invaluable or as mentioned the ability to shoot raw without clogging the buffer and a 3 channel histogram to check exposure, and good low light performance for flashless shooting in a dim church or outdoor shade.  SignaturePaul Furman http://www.edgehill.net/1 Bay Natives http://www.baynatives.com >For good quality portrait enlargements up to say 11x14... > >How many megapixels should I expect to have to purchase? is 10 enough? >16? >(is there anything else I may need to know about digital resolution?) "Necessary resolution" is one of those arbitrary quantities that varies with the circumstance and with the viewer. Printing at 200 dots per inch is generally considered suitable; but 300 is better. And 150 dpi is about minimum, though many will accept 100 dpi and on occasion, for some uses, even 72 dpi is acceptable. Given that, here is a chart which shows print size versus pixel counts for various sizes. Actual image sizes are based on a 3:4 aspect ratio (width:height) that fills the width (and is cropped in the vertical dimension to fit the print size). Print || | | | | size || 8x10 | 11x14 | 16x20 | 20x24 | ------------------------------------------------------------ || | | | | Image || | | | | size 3:4 || 8x10.7 | 11x14.7 | 16x21 | 20x26.7 | || | | | | ===========================================================- || | | | | 100 dpi || 800x1066 | 1100x1466 | 1600x2133 | 2000x2666 | || 0.85 MP | 1.62 MP | 3.41 MP | 5.33 MP | || | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------ || | | | | 150 dpi || 1200x1920 | 1650x3000 | 2400x4000 | 3000x4000 | || 2.30 MP | 4.95 MP | 9.60 MP | 12.00 MP | || | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------ || | | | | 200 dpi || 1600x2133 | 2200x2933 | 3200x4266 | 4000x5332 | || 3.41 MP | 6.45 MP | 13.65 MP | 21.33 MP | || | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------ || | | | | 300 dpi || 3200x4266 | 3300x4400 | 4800x6400 | 6000x8000 | || 13.65 MP | 14.52 MP | 30.72 MP | 48.00 MP | || | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------ If 100 dpi prints are acceptable, a 5 MP camera will suffice for prints up to 20x24 inches. If 150 dpi is acceptable, only top of the line >12 MP cameras will do for 20x24 and 10 MP is needed for 16x20 prints. If really top quality 200 or 300 dpi prints are required, obviously even the best DSLR's cannot deliver enough pixels for the larger sized prints. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com > ------------------------------------------------------------ > || | | | | > 150 dpi || 1200x1920 | 1650x3000 | 2400x4000 | 3000x4000 | > || 2.30 MP | 4.95 MP | 9.60 MP | 12.00 MP | > || | | | | > ------------------------------------------------------------ >prints up to 20x24 inches. If 150 dpi is acceptable, only top >of the line >12 MP cameras will do for 20x24 and 10 MP is >needed for 16x20 prints. Typo alert: where it says 2400x4000, that should have been 2400x3000, which makes the pixel count 7.2 MP instead of 9.6 MP for 16x20 prints. SignatureFloyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.